Will Samyang start making autofocus lenses for Nikon F-mount? (first Canon autofocus lens coming soon)

I have reported on several occasions in the past that Samyang will start producing autofocus DSLR lenses (see also this and this posts). The first Samyang AF 14mm f/2.8 EF autofocus lens for Canon mount will be announced in a few days. We have to see if Samyang will also start producing autofocus lenses also for Nikon F-mount (my guess is yes).

Picture credit: Samyang

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Finally! Samyang is focusing on the right stuff.

    • Lihkin

      ‘focusing’ being the keyword. 😀

  • DieMusik

    Will buy their AF lenses!

    • ZsirosLangos

      Go for used Nikkor glass instead.

      • TurtleCat

        Generally I agree. It’s a good option. But you don’t have a warranty (or a very short one) and you don’t know what abuse it has had. So it’s a bit riskier. And it still might not be cheaper.

        • ZsirosLangos

          Still less risky than buying Samyang AF glass…

          • TurtleCat

            Maybe. I don’t have enough information to say that’s necessarily true.

          • DieMusik

            I don’t know what your experience has been with Samyang. But their glass is quite good and I have never had a warranty issue with them. No, old Nikkors won’t cut it for me and I have a plenty of them.

            • ZsirosLangos

              Their manual glass is fine, the 12 f2.0 is really good actually. I just don’t trust their AF mechanics.

  • Spy Black

    Could this also be the Yongnuo?

  • Samyang must be negotiating an incentive deal with Nikon. It was Nikon that had prohibited certain manufacturers from using their proprietary AF mount to avoid competition with their own lenses.

    • Abhinav

      How did Tamron and Sigma manage to do so till now ?

      • ZsirosLangos

        Reverse engineering.

        • Eta76

          I read Tamron and Tokina have license for the mount, and therefor should have less trouble. Don’t know for sure if this an urban legend 🙂

          • ZsirosLangos

            Could be, I avoid Sigma like the plague because of their AF issues

      • I guess they probably paid the piper. I was in a discussion once with a senior Zeiss lens rep, and asked him why Zeiss lenses didn’t have Nikon AF. He said that Zeiss would love to have it, but Nikon wouldn’t allow it.

  • decentrist

    oh boy, AF to go with cheap construction.

    • Aditya Gupta

      But these lenses are really helpful to us…low income people.

      • ZsirosLangos

        I’d rather take an mf UWA at that price point. If you’re concerned about money, why not go for used Nikkor glass?!

    • Fry

      …unlike the exquisite plastic construction of modern Nikon lenses

      • PhilK

        I don’t think we live in an era where anything not made of metal is automatically poor quality. Especially since the meaning of “plastic” has expanded greatly over the last 20-30 years. Now they are using all sorts of composite materials, many of which have very nice characteristics.

        If Nikon went back to making everything out of metal, thousands of people would gripe that the lenses were too heavy now. AF VR lenses are much more mechanically complex than the old MF lenses, and contain many more parts.

        • Fry

          The point was that Samyang lenses have a better build quality than at least Nikon’s mid-range lenses, rivaling Nikon’s pro grade lenses, so complaining about their “cheap construction” is pure ignorance of facts by @decentrist:disqus

          • PhilK

            Not sure what you mean by “better build quality” but if by that you mean “feels like an old-fashioned metal lens” that may or may not have any long-term impact on the product reliability. (Whether or not you like the feel in your hand or the look to your eye better. 😉 )

            Seems to me that a large percentage of the new wave of inexpensive 3rd-party lenses coming from places like China and Korea started out with mostly-metal manual-focus lenses that were very reminiscent of the kinds of products made in the 1970s and 1980s by the likes of Vivitar and Soligor, etc. Because “old fashioned” metal MF lenses have been well-studied and are straightforward to produce.

            I suspect that these new lensmakers will eventually move towards non-metal plastic/composite construction – once they gain the capability – just like many modern Canon and Nikon lenses.

            • Fry

              The difference in build quality between consumer level Nikon lenses (say the 35mm 1.8 DX) and lenses from Samyang, Voigtlander etc is absolutely obvious. If you prefer the plasticky feel of the Nikons, that’s fine. But for some people – including me – that plastic construction along with the horrible zoom and focusing rings on Nikons is what I would call “cheap construction”.

            • PhilK

              And a lot those design choices are intentional and sometimes even for “good reasons”.

              Certainly many people would scream bloody murder if all Nikon lenses going forward weighed 50 or 70% more than their predecessors. Or cost twice as much.

              I for one have never been a fan of many of the AF-S era lens ergonomics, because I don’t like tiny focus rings and I prefer focus rings at the front of the lens, not the back. (But the reason for the physical location generally has to do with the internal parts that the rings control, which I understand, but I still prefer substantially-sized “zoom at the back, focus at the front” controls.)

              The way some companies address that is they use “control by wire” designs – eg Sony – but this leads to other ergonomic issues, like the feeling that you are not directly controlling some setting, but through some kind of elastic “rubber band”, and that the controls do not maintain their settings through a power-cycle. (The same complaints that often surface amongst car buffs in regards to car controls that work similiarly)

            • Fry

              The cheaply built plastic 35mm f1.8 DX lens weights 197g, the old 35mm f2 AF-D lens covers FX and weights 200g.

              It’s not really about weight, it’s about using cheaper materials to have higher margins. The manufacturers stopped caring about weight a long time ago – that’s why a standard 50mm prime can weight freaking 800 grams these days !

            • PhilK

              I can say with a high degree of confidence that you just made a variety of speculations that are likely not supportable, eg “manufacturers stopped caring about weight”… LOL.

              Not wasting any more time on this subthread.

            • Chris T

              Good point….but the 35mm f2 af-d is also plastic too maybe you meant the Ais one?

      • The 58mm 1.4G is made out of plastic, it’s lightweight but I won’t say it’s built “cheap”.

      • ZsirosLangos

        You don’t know much about modern material I see…

    • The only Samyang lens I own is better built than all the Nikkors I’ve had.

      • Jim

        Must not have owned many Nikon lenses then.

        • That’s true. But they’re in the same price range as the said Samyang so I think it’s a fair comparison.

        • bobgrant

          I’ve got some great Nikon glass. But as “consumer” level glass, Samyang is really well built. 3rd party lens makers are not laying down. Few lenses feel better than the Sigma ART primes, except maybe Zeiss. Tokina and Tamron are also building some great lenses. Nikon and Canon have a real fight on their hands, which is good for us.

  • Tin Zi

    I had the 85mm 1.4 and image quality was terrific. With AF it will be a monster deal and i don’t see why anyone would want to buy the nikon 1.4G.

  • Rhonbo

    The question is will we get consistent AF at large apertures with Canon and Nikon? Some brands can’t seem figure out how to work around the AF road blocks Canikon seems to put into their camera bodies ( just look at the forums regarding the ART series). I hope they get it right. Third party AF has always been an issue with many bodies.

  • Todd

    The official samyang facebook page said they were going to make them for nikon and canon mount when the sony 50 af was first annouced / released… they just never gave a date… they said “in the future”

  • umad?

    Love Samyang lenses. Bought the 16mm f/2 almost 2 years ago and it produces awesome images on my D7100. And btw build quality it’s great. I’ts my most used lens and I’ve never had a problem with it.

  • Nikkor300f4VR

    I they would do, I would buy.

  • TurtleCat

    I could dig it. Their 135 f2 is excellent. I use it for astro when I have time. The 85 1.4 was pretty darn good, too, even if a bit soft wide open. It would be a nice choice.

  • Richard Hopkins

    Cheap, light (I assume), good performance and now with autofocus? Sign me up!

    • No longer that cheap. They have been steadily increasing the prices for newer lenses.

  • Quality control should be first priority over auto focus.

  • Making the 14mm their first foray into AF for Canikon seems odd. I use the MF version and, as handy as it might be, don’t see the urgency in offering that. The lens is easy to use and get good results without AF. It would make more sense to offer it in the 50 1.4 or 85 1.4.

  • Back to top